Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/History of leather gloves in fiction

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was delete. King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 03:45, 26 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

History of leather gloves in fiction[edit]

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

This seems to be a collection of trivia about the appearance of leather gloves in fiction, as satirized in this xkcd comic. Also original research. ... discospinster _talk 04:06, 19 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Fictional elements-related deletion discussions. czar · · 04:57, 19 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Fashion-related deletion discussions. czar · · 04:57, 19 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

delete as trivia collection. Mangoe (talk) 14:26, 19 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Delete, not without regret, and with kudos for the pure randomness of this article. - Smerdis of Tlön - killing the human spirit since 2003! 15:25, 19 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Truly an excellent article... needs better sources, though. The Yahoo! answers and Youtube clips fail per WP:RS... Deltopia (talk) 16:16, 19 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Trivia. Delete per xkcd. - Mike Rosoft (talk) 20:12, 19 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]
It's time to take the gloves off of Wikipedia as chaotic trivia. Somebody had a bit too much time on their (no doubt leather-clad) hands. Clarityfiend (talk) 21:24, 19 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. Unless someone can find a book or two written on the subject... Grande (talk) 23:25, 19 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I found a couple, but I got distracted looking at the pictures..... - Smerdis of Tlön - killing the human spirit since 2003! 04:13, 20 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Delete Though I found it quite enjoyable to read, I must suggestion deletion on the basis that it's a collection of trivia on a very obscure subject. HillbillyGoat (talk) 23:53, 21 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. This article is hilarious, bizarre, and quirky, but it's not encyclopedic. Chri$topher 23:29, 23 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.